Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 18:35:48 +0100 From: Guido Falsi <mad@madpilot.net> To: Rick Chisholm <rchisholm@parallel42.ca> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: squidGuard-1.4 Message-ID: <20090121173548.GA91761@megatron.madpilot.net> In-Reply-To: <49773E9B.40802@parallel42.ca> References: <49763159.2070901@parallel42.ca> <497638D3.1000908@madpilot.net> <4976BC15.3080209@FreeBSD.org> <20090121121915.GA89663@megatron.madpilot.net> <49773E9B.40802@parallel42.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:26:19AM -0500, Rick Chisholm wrote: >> I agree. I was thinking if it could be acceptable to add an option to >> the port for installing/not installing the sample blacklists and not >> adding those to the plist anyway. This could be easier to handle. >> Perhaps also more logical. >> >> With this change a note on deinstall to check and remove by hand the >> folder should also be added, obviously. >> >> > That might make more sense, esp. if a user has created numerous large > dbs rather than downloading them from a 3rd party. It wasn't disastrous > for me since I upgraded a test server first, but it would be preferable > if the upgrade didn't touch the db dir or squidGuard.conf. As I said that was behaviour already present in the port logic. I will make some experiments in this direction and modify the port as needed. Only doubt I have is, how will tinderboxes react to this kind of implementation? -- Guido Falsi <mad@madpilot.net>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090121173548.GA91761>